Surviving Tsarist state in Finland

I've had this idea floating around in my head for a bit, so I finally decided to share it with all of you. How would the world change due to it's existence? Basically Nicholas II does not attempt to Russify the Finns in ITL, and so there are no major anti-Russian sentiments in the country as a result.

This also assumes that Finland's pro-German independence movements would not be as prominent as there was no attempted Russification, and also that there is either no, or a much less bloody Finnish civil war that results in there being no German landing of troops in the country. If necessary the Tsar can flee to Finland before the October Revolution, thus already being in place to establish himself in the country.

In any case, following the outbreak of the the Bolshevik Revolution and Russian Civil War, the Tsar reestablishes the "Russian Empire" in Helsinki. With the help the Finnish Army as well as Tsarist White Russian forces, they manage to seize all of (including outer) Karelia over the course of the civil war, as well as Petrograd.

They might push further in the course of the war, but the Red Army pushes them back by sheer weight of numbers. They successfully manage to hold them off in the end however by fortifying Kolme Kangasta and forcing them to a cease fire as they fail to penetrate the narrow land bridges. Following the war the Tsar (Either Nicky of Michael, if Nicky and his son are still killed) allows all pro-White emigres to settle in Finland, thus significantly boosting Russian influence in the country. There are also a lot more emigres since they have a friendly and nearby place they can flee to, resulting in a much more populous Finland.

So the question here is how do you think Finland, and the world in general will develop with a rump Russian Empire (or a wank Finland depending on your POV) still in existence and bordering the USSR?

FinnishEmpire.png

What I'd imagine the borders would look like.
 
Last edited:
For starters I think we would need to see someoner more competent than Nicholas II at the head in order for long term success to be achieved.
 
It becomes the Finnish Empire within a generation. White émigrés are not going to be enough to tilt the balance away from the majority of Finns and any attempt to do so (such as resettling Russians on Finnish land) is only going to alienate them further. Why would the Finns surrender their independence in the first place?

And what about the Finnish Civil War? Are you handwaving the Red Finns out of the picture? You could argue that this is one way for the Tsar to gain support of the moderate Finns... but fighting a civil war and holding off the Red Army is some stretch. Especially given the general incompetence of the historical Imperial Army

Of course that's not going to matter once USSR finally gets round to retaking Petrograd. In fact holding that city against its population alone would probably require enough troops to bankrupt the new Tsardom

If I'm coming off as overly sceptical its because the Tsardom was one of the most incompetent and politically bankrupt regimes in history. Its one that is almost impossible to save without major rewrites of its motivations, methods, and competency levels
 

Markus

Banned
I don´t think a tsarist Finnland has little chance for survival. In OTL the Communists fought the stateless exils with great tenacity until they were convinced the exiles were no longer a threat to the USSR. Something a tsarist Finnland will be as long as it exists. Meaning the Communists will make sure it does not exist very long, if they win the civil war. Which is not guaranteed if the Tsar controlls St. Petersburg. However the white Russians wanted to restore the old empire, which cost them a lot of support from minorities who wanted independance.
 
There were some competent Finnish commanders during the Civil War like Mannerheim, it wouldn't be all incompetent former officers of the old Imperial Army. Also, I already said the Tsar could be be Grand Duke Michael Romanov on the throne instead, since he was the heir apparent after Nicky's abdication. We really don't know how competent he would be. Also, no matter how much the Soviets wanted to defeat the Russians in Finland, I don't see what they could do with the Kolme Kangasta fortified. It nullifies their numerical advantage and is a deathtrap for any attacker.

Plus, don't forget, this rump Russian Empire will likely be a rallying point for many of the otherwise disunited and fractured pro-Tsarist generals in the war, so when they lose on their respective fronts they can retreat with their surviving armies to Finland. They would also have significant foreign support from the Entente, so I don't see why things are hopeless for them. They have an easily defensible position and plenty of foreign support.
 
Last edited:
Well, Russification was a common theme around the empire at that time, so you'd need to find a way to shield Finland. We are well into ASB territory here, but what about instead of Michael falling in love with and secretly marrying a Russian commoner, and getting exiled to England for it, he falls in love with a Finnish commoner while vacationing on the Gulf of Finland, marries her, and gets exiled to the position of General Governor of Finland. Needs to happen arount 1897, he would be 18 then. He could get some mentoring from Heiden, who was subtle with his Russification efforts. Finnish civil war could probably be avoided, if the reforms from 1905 could be implemented without the Tsar dragging his feet. So when Nicholas abdicates in 1917, Michael would be in Helsinki as a direct representative of the Tsar. Should be a smooth transition.
 
Well, Russification was a common theme around the empire at that time, so you'd need to find a way to shield Finland. We are well into ASB territory here, but what about instead of Michael falling in love with and secretly marrying a Russian commoner, and getting exiled to England for it, he falls in love with a Finnish commoner while vacationing on the Gulf of Finland, marries her, and gets exiled to the position of General Governor of Finland. Needs to happen arount 1897, he would be 18 then. He could get some mentoring from Heiden, who was subtle with his Russification efforts. Finnish civil war could probably be avoided, if the reforms from 1905 could be implemented without the Tsar dragging his feet. So when Nicholas abdicates in 1917, Michael would be in Helsinki as a direct representative of the Tsar. Should be a smooth transition.

Good idea there, I like it. Anyone is welcomed to build off of this to give us a plausible scenario. I'm mostly concerned with getting past the "how" though, and analyzing how the world would change as a result of it's existence.
 
Well, assuming Michael had influence, which he probably would, he might get the military reforms that were the reason of 1899 february manifesto implemented in some acceptable compromise form. No manifesto, MUCH lessened anti-russian sentiment. Military reforms would mean stronger Finnish army, which would be useful in 1917.

He didn't accept the throne in OTL, because his safety could not be guaranteed. Shouldn't be much a problem here, if he needs to go to St.Petersburg, he could get a Finnish security force with him. He was more popular general than Nicholas, so Russian army might be somewhat loyal to him. If he could act sanely and decisively, say disengage from WW1 and initiate some political reforms QUICKLY, he might prevent the October revolution altogether, certainly postpone it and make it more difficult.

I wonder what WW2 would look like with Russian empire as a constitutional monarchy? Of course, it wouldn't look anything like the map you presented here.
 
There were some competent Finnish commanders during the Civil War like Mannerheim, it wouldn't be all incompetent former officers of the old Imperial Army.
Taking into account that Mannerheim was, according to contemporary accounts, one of less competent commanders of the old Imperial Army, this is an interesting statement.
 
CanadianGoose, strange that such an incompetent repeatedly outperformed larger and better equipped forces.:p

On a more practical note, in the event of this happening St Petersburg alone would make 'Finland' a dual-nationality state and given the number of people fleeing Soviet atrocities it isn't impossible to imagine 'Finland' with 10 million people in total, less than 4 million of them Finns. Such a state might have a few internal fissures which the Soviets would find useful.

Another issue might be complications. Given a larger and stronger Finland perhaps the Soviets have stronger forces in the region and one or more of the Baltic States go down 1920-21, with Estonia being the obvious target.

If sufficient White Russian forces arrive or the Western Allies provide military support to the 'true' Russian government then given Lenin's clear interest in avoiding unnecessary entanglements(terms with Poland being especially generous) this state might well survive to WWII.

For the naval buffs we can have them determine which additional ships go over to the Tsar of Finland and whether this has a deleterious effect on the Soviet fleet.

Given undisputed Finnish hostility to the Soviets and possibly to Germany, for letting Lenin in to Russia, this might involve a coalition with Poland and even the Baltic States but neutral Sweden is probably noticeably less friendly to Helsinki.
 
CanadianGoose, strange that such an incompetent repeatedly outperformed larger and better equipped forces.:p
I would be interested to see details of ATL you refer to. IOTL Finland was granted independence by the Lenin and Mannerheim defeated numerically inferior and poorly organized Reds using German imperial troops and Finnish units trained in Germany.
 
Top